Ten first grade students who had responded poorly to a Tier 2 reading intervention in a response to intervention (RTI) model received an intervention of video self–modeling to improve decoding skills and sight word recognition. Students were video recorded blending and segmenting decodable words and reading sight words. Videos were edited and viewed a minimum of four times per week. Data were collected twice per week using curriculum–based measures. A single subject multiple baseline across participants design was used. Results indicated an increase in decoding skills and sight word recognition for all participants. A 2–week posttest maintenance assessment showed retention or increases for 70 percent of participants. Results from the study offer promise for a specific intervention that may reach particular students who respond poorly to Tier 2 reading instruction.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BanduraA., & HustonA. C. (1961). Identification as a process of incidental learning. Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, 63, 311–318.
2.
BanduraA., RossD., & RossS. A. (1961). Transmission of aggression through imitation of aggressive models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 63, 575–582.
3.
BanduraA. (1997). Self–efficacy: The exercise of control (pp. 604). New York: Freeman.
4.
BanduraA. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 1–26.
5.
BelliniS., & AkullianJ. (2007). A meta–analysis of video modeling and video self–modeling interventions for children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorders. [Online version]. Council for Exceptional Children, 73, 264–287.
6.
BuggeyT. (2005). Video self–modeling applications with children with autism spectrum disorder in a small private school. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 20(1), 52–63.
7.
CharlopM. H., & MilsteinJ. P. (1989). Teaching autistic children conversational speech using video modeling. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 22, 275–285.
8.
ChenW., & LooiC. (2011). Active classroom participation in a group scribbles primary science classroom. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(4), 676–686.
9.
ClareS., JensonW., KehleT., & BrayM. (2000). Self–modeling as a treatment for increasing on–task behavior. Psychology in Schools, 37, 517–522.
10.
CreerT. L., & MiklichD. R. (1970). The application of a self–modeling procedure to modify inappropriate behavior: A preliminary report. Behavior Research and Therapy, 9, 22–25.
11.
DentonC. A. (2012). Response to intervention for reading difficulties in the primary grades: Some answers and lingering questions. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45, 232–243.
12.
DowrickP. W., & WardK. M. (1997). Video feedforward in the support of a man with intellectual disability and inappropriate sexual behavior. Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disability, 22, 147–160.
13.
DowrickP. W. (1999). A review of self modeling and related interventions. Applied and Preventive Psychology, 8, 23–39.
14.
DowrickP.W. (2006). Wherefore art the self in the model?Intellectual Disability Australasia, 27(2), 3–6.
15.
DowrickP. W., Kim–RupnowW. S., & PowerT. J. (2006). Video feedforward for reading. The Journal of Special Education, 39, 194–207.
16.
EdlH. M. (2007) Examining the impact of video self modeling on the reading fluency of upper elementary and middle school students with significant reading disabilities. Department of counseling and educational psychology, Indiana University.
17.
EdyburnD. L. (2006). Searching for evidence of the effectiveness of assistive or instructional technology interventions. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(2), 74–78.
18.
EhriL. C., SatlowE., & GaskinsI. (2009). Grapho–phonemic enrichment strengthens keyword analogy instruction for struggling young readers. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 25, 162–191.
19.
ElliottJ., LeeS. W., & TollefsonJ. (2001). A reliability and validity study of the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills–Modified. School Psychology Review, 30(1), 33–49.
20.
FuchsD., ComptonD. L., FuchsL. S., BryantJ., & DavisG. N. (2008). Making “secondary intervention” work in a three–tier responsiveness–to–intervention model: Findings from the first–grade longitudinal reading study of the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 21, 413–436.
21.
FuchsL. S., & FuchsD. (2007). A model for implementing responsiveness–to–intervention. Teaching Exceptional Children, 39(5), 14–20.
22.
GoodR. H., KaminskiR. A., ShinnM., BrattenJ., ShinnM., LaimonL., et al. (2004). Technical adequacy and decision making utility of DIBELS (Technical Report No. 7). Eugene, OR: University of Oregon.
23.
GreenbergD., BuggeyT., & BondC. L. (2002). Video Self–modeling as a tool for improving oral reading fluency and self–confidence. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No: ED471 091.
24.
HasselbringT. S., & Williams GlaserC. (2000). Use of computer technology to help students with special needs. The Future of Children, 10(2), 1–21.
25.
HausfatherS. J. (1996). Vygotsky and schooling: Creating a social context for learning. Action in Teacher Education, 18(2), 1–10.
26.
HenkW. A., & MelnickS.A. (1995). The reader self–perception scale (RSPS): A new tool for measuring how children feel about themselves as readers. The Reading Teacher, 48, 470–482.
27.
HinkleD. E.; WiersmaW.; & JursS. G. (2003). Applied statistics for the behavioral sciences (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.
28.
HitchcockC. H., DowrickP. W., & PraterM. A. (2003). Video self–modeling intervention in school–based settings: A review. Remedial and Special Education, 24, 36–45.
29.
HitchcockC. H., PraterM. A., & DowrickP. W. (2004). Reading comprehension and fluency: Examining the effects of tutoring and video self–modeling on first–grade students with reading difficulties. Learning Disability Quarterly, 27, 89–103.
30.
HolmesW. (2011). Using game–based learning to support struggling readers at home. Learning, Media and Technology, 36(1), 5–19.
31.
HornerR. H., CarrE. G., HalleJ., McGeeG., OdomS., & WoleryM. (2005). The use of single–subject research to identify evidence–based practice in special education. Exceptional Children, 71(2), 165–179.
32.
KlassenR. (2002). Writing in early adolescence: A review of the role of self–efficacy beliefs. Educational Psychology Review, 14, 173–203.
33.
KlingnerJ. K. (2004). Assessing reading comprehension. Assessment for Effective Instruction (formerly Diagnostique), 29(4), 59–70.
34.
LaBergeD., & SamuelsS. J. (1974). Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6(2), 293–323.
35.
LasaterM. W., & BradyM. P. (1995). Effects of video self–modeling and feedback on task fluency: A home–based intervention. Education & Treatment of Children, 18, 389–408.
36.
MargolisH., & McCabeP. P. (2003). Self–efficacy: A key to improving the motivation of struggling learners. Preventing School Failure, 47(4), 162–69.
37.
McBride–ChangC., & ManisF. R. (1996). Structural invariance in the associations of naming speed, phonological awareness, and verbal reasoning in good and poor readers: A test of the double deficit hypothesis. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 8, 323–339.
38.
McCrayA. D., VaughnS., & NealL. I. (2001). Not all students learn to read by third grade: Middle school students speak out about their reading disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 35, 17–30.
39.
O'ConnorR. E., & JenkinsJ. (1999). Prediction of reading disabilities in kindergarten and first grade. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3, 159–197.
40.
O'ConnorR. E. (2000). Increasing the intensity of intervention in kindergarten and first grade. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 15, 43–54.
41.
O'ConnorR. E., BocianK., Beebe–FrankenbergerM., & LinklaterD.(2010). Responsiveness of students with language difficulties to early intervention in reading. Journal of Special Education, 43, 220–235.
42.
O'ConnorR.E., HartyK., & FulmerD. (2005). Tiers of Intervention in Kindergarten Through Third Grade. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 532–538.
43.
O'ConnorR. E., FulmerD., HartyK. R., & BellK. M. (2005). Layers of reading intervention in kindergarten through third grade: Changes in teaching and student outcomes. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 440–455.
44.
O'ConnorR. E., SwansonH.L., & GeraghtyC. (2010). Improvement in reading rate under independent and difficult text levels: Influences on word and comprehension skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 1–19.
45.
ParkerR. I. & BrossartD. F. (2003). Evaluating single–case data: A comparison of seven statistical methods. Behavior Therapy, 34, 189–211.
46.
Riley–TillmanT. C, & BurnsM. K. (2009). Evaluating educational interventions: Single–case design for measuring response to intervention. NY: The Guilford Press
47.
ScruggsT. E., & MastropieriM. A. (1998). Summarizing single–subject research: Issues and applications. Behavior Modification, 22, 221–242.
48.
SheffelbineJ. (2006). Systematic instruction in phoneme awareness, phonics, and sight words. Oakland, CA: Developmental studies center.
49.
ShererM., PierceK. L., PardesS., & KisackyK., et al. (2001). Enhancing conversation skills in children with autism via video technology. Behavior Modification, 25, 140–158.
50.
SimmonsD. C., CoyneM. D., KwokO., McDonaghS., HamB., & Kame'enuiE. J. (2008). Indexing response to intervention: A longitudinal study of reading risk from kindergarten through third grade. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41, 158–173.
51.
SwansonH. L., HowardC. B. (2005). Children with reading disabilities: Does dynamic assessment help in the classification?Learning Disability Quarterly, 28, 17–34.
52.
VaughnS., WanzekJ., WexlerJ., BarthA., CirinoP.T., & FletcherJ.M. (2009). The relative effects of group size on reading progress of older students with reading difficulties. Reading and Writing. 10.1007.
53.
VellutinoF. R., ScanlonD. M., ZhangH., & SchatschneiderC. (2008). Using response to kindergarten and first grade intervention to identify children at–risk for long–term reading difficulties. Reading and Writing, 21, 437–480.
54.
VygotskyL. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
55.
WanzekJ., & VaughnS. (2007). Research–based implications from extensive early reading interventions. School Psychology Review, 36, 541–561.
56.
WanzekJ., & VaughnS. (2008). Response to varying amounts of time in reading intervention for students with low response to intervention. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41, 126–142.
57.
WertB. Y., & NeisworthJ. T. (2003). Effects of video self–modeling on spontaneous requesting in children with autism. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 5, 30–34.
58.
WilsonB. A. (1999). Older students: Making reading happen. Perspectives, 25(3)
